Thursday, March 31, 2011

European Union to ban cars from cities by 2050
Cars will be banned from London and all other cities across Europe under a draconian EU masterplan to cut CO2 emissions by 60 per cent over the next 40 years. Top of the EU's list to cut climate change emissions is a target of "zero" for the number of petrol and diesel-driven cars and lorries in the EU's future cities……"That means no more conventionally fuelled cars in our city centres," he said. "Action will follow, legislation, real action to change behaviour."……he wants to bring everywhere to a grinding halt and to plunge us into a new dark age, he is on the right track……The man is off his rocker."…….

"Curbing mobility is not an option, neither is business as usual. We can break the transport system's dependence on oil without sacrificing its efficiency and compromising mobility. It can be win-win," he claimed….."The EU must be living in an alternate reality…..

My Take – Did anyone ever read Orwell’s Animal House? Maybe everyone should! These are the decisions of bureaucrats attempting to stop anthropogenic global warming. In other words….unelected, unaccountable bean counters and greenie activists in positions of power want to destroy everyone’s freedoms and the economy by imposing their views on how life should be lived…by everyone else….. in order to fight something that doesn’t exist. No sane person could possibly think that this will not impact society negatively? I wonder if these people have children and grandchildren. If so, do they not think that they will also be negatively impacted by these decisions? If so….then I have to ask…...are they sane?

I would like to bring to your attention, Alan Caruba’s series on PBA.Alan has ompleted three parts of what will become a six part series and plans to have it all done by June. Please check out Caruba’s Corner; Green Myths and Other Lies section of this blog for any number of insightful articles. Alan has given me permission to reprint all of his work involving environmental issues and organize it by topic. That will take some time as Alan is a prolific writer.

STALL, BABY, STALL
It's unbelievable (literally) the rhetoric on "America's Energy Security" President Obama is once again giving lip service to a "new energy proposal"; but let's remember the last time he trotted out a "new energy proposal" - nearly a year ago to the day. The main difference is today we have $4 a gallon gas in some places in the country. This is no accident. …..Through a process of what candidate Obama once called "gradual adjustment," American consumers have seen prices at the pump rise 67 percent since he took office. Meanwhile, the vast undeveloped reserves that could help to keep prices at the pump affordable remain locked up because of President Obama's deliberate unwillingness to drill here and drill now.

We're subsidizing offshore drilling in Brazil and purchasing energy from them, instead of drilling ourselves and keeping those dollars circulating in our own economy to generate jobs here.

My Take -I always love the line….”there is no quick fixes”. I hear the same thing about bed bugs. “There’s no silver bullet!” The rhetoric is always the same. And so is the outcome. The job doesn’t get done.

Bed bugs are becoming a plague and gasoline is working its way up to five dollars a gallon by summer. No, there are no quick fixes, because no one is picking tools that work. It’s like an auto mechanic complaining that he can’t get the job done because he has to bend over to pick up his wrench.

They claim that we’ll create good paying green jobs. Didn’t happen and it will never happen. For every green job created 2.2 jobs is lost….and this whole business as to what constitutes a green job is highly subjective, and even the greenies can’t exactly decide what a “green job” really is. Then again….why should that surprise anyone. They will create clean energy. That won’t happen without bankrupting and blacking out the nation. They will stop putting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a result of anything mankind is doing. Not without destroying the economy….or killing all of humanity.

No, there are no quick fixes and there is no silver bullet….and it is by design. Of course, what they are proposing has been accomplished elsewhere.

And Harry Reid calls people “radical”. I wonder which side of the line Harry would live on?

Against All Energy Anywhere
By Alan Caruba
One of the great afflictions of the environmentalists—Greens—everywhere is a profound lack of understanding of the role that energy plays in whether a nation prospers or just limps along, barely keeping the lights on.

A classic case is the communist paradise of North Korea that is almost completely dark at night while just across the 38th parallel, South Korea is ablaze with light, energy, and a thriving economy.

Morons Who Hate Oil
By Alan Caruba
It may seem harsh to call people who actively spread lies about oil “morons”, but that assumes they do so out of ignorance as opposed to those who do so for some crazed “environmental” reason that is so out of touch with reality it invites scorn.
According to the Congressional Research Service, America’s combined energy resources, oil, coal, and natural gas, are the largest on Earth!

It is insane that Americans will be paying $4, $5 or more for a gallon of gasoline and it is insane to believe environmentalists when they tell you the Earth is running out of oil “by the end of this century.”

Scientist Predicts New Ice AgeOn the heels of the pronouncement by one of the gurus of global warming that any decrease in the earth’s temperature could be a thousand years away, another scientist has stepped forward with the warning that a new Ice Age could be right around the corner. Professor Tim Flannery, the head of Australia’s Climate Change Commission, sparked the latest scandal in the global warming community when he recently declared, "If the world as a whole cut all emissions tomorrow, the average temperature of the planet's not going to drop for several hundred years, perhaps over 1000 years."........Thus, Kukla’s theory of a new Ice Age is utterly different from the Holdren/Ehrlich’s “new Ice Age” of the 1970s, or the “global warming” scare which has predominated in the circles of scientific apocalypticism in recent decades. If Kukla is right, the Ice Age will come according to its own schedule, and there’s nothing that the human race can do about it—except, of course, for enjoying the brief warming that precedes the big chill.

My Take - At Least he sees the lunacy of all the greenie scares about new ice ages and global warming. Here at least is a scientific basis for his fears. There has been a lot of disucssion regarding the potential for the sun's latest cycle causing a Dalton Minimun.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

When I began this series about bisphenol-A, BPA, I instituted a Google Alert for Internet posts that mentioned it. From January through March it generated a report each day filled with notifications of newspaper, magazine, and Internet posts all denouncing BPA has a hazardous chemical that threatened the health of everyone from infants to adults.

More than one thousand posts were reported. Virtually all spread false information.

Such things do not happen by accident. They are the result of a concerted effort to defame BPA and they are indicative of a massive public relations effort. Serendipitously, on March 2nd the National Review published an article by Jon Entire, “Don’t Rush to Ban Chemicals” that revealed how public opinion is manipulated by the use of dubious “scientific studies” and the way most people, unschooled in science, do not realize that “one part per billion” of any substance poses no risk at all.

Entine cited a survey that found that “Canadians on average have about one part per billion of BPA in their urine, while Americans have twice that amount” noting that this “is not just meaningless, let alone news by any definition, but is part of the massive public relations campaign to get BPA banned”

“Labeling a chemical ‘toxic’ or a ‘contaminant’ is meaningless,” said Entine. “Toxicity is a question of degree; exposure is different from effect. Apples, bananas, broccoli, cabbage, citrus fruits, mushrooms, turnips, and many more foods contain occurring chemicals that are toxic—they cause cancer at large lifelong doses in laboratory rodents. Tofu is more estrogenic than BPA.”

Anyone who wants to learn the truth about BPA is advised to visit Junkscience.com, the website of Steve Milloy who has gained a solid reputation for debunking so-called “science based” fear campaigns. His data on BPA reveals that “there is no scientific evidence that BPA:

• Has ever harmed anyone despite 50 years of use;
• Acts as an endocrine disruptor; and
• Has any health effects at low doses;

Furthermore, the data debunks some of the most off-cited and false claims about BPA.

• BPA is not carcinogenic or mutagenic;
• BPA does not adversely affect reproduction or development at any realistic dose;
• BPA is efficiently “metabolized” and rapidly excreted after oral exposure

So where does the worldwide anti-BPA public relations campaign originate?

The answer to that has to be by inference, but many trace it to Fenton Communications whose founder, David Fenton, has left-wing associations and affiliations dating all the way back to the domestic terror group, the Weatherman, for whom he was a photographer.

In a lengthy profile on DiscoverTheNetworks.org, one learns that in 1982, he established Fenton Communications, specializing in advancing the agendas of “left-wing groups.” “One of Fenton’s most widely publicized achievements was his 1989 attack against the producers of Alar, a preservative (used on apples) that he erroneously characterized as carcinogenic.” The cost to American apple growers and distributors was catastrophic. It was deceptive.

The anti-BPA scare campaign is patterned on the anti-Alar campaign and a further link is found in the fact that two of Fenton’s longtime clients, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Environmental Working Group are leaders in the anti-BPA campaign. Moreover, BornFree, a company that specializes in products that do not contain BPA, is also a Fenton client.

In the book, “The Fear Profiteers”, Fenton Communications was identified as having “played a key role in a growing number of health scare campaigns.” At the time the book was published, Fenton was linked to “scares about Alar and apples, swordfish, leaky breast implants, and a front group (a favorite PR ploy) Health Care Without Harm that put forth lies about the alleged, but unproven danger of phthalates; chemicals used to make plastic flexible products for IV bags, nipples, and children’s toys.

Suffice to say Fenton Communications is opposed to anything that has to do with plastic, no matter how useful and safe the product may be. BPA has been in use for over fifty years to line the insides of metal and plastic food containers, protecting against spoilage. More than 6,000 studies have been made over the years and none have demonstrated any hazard.

“If you have been scared about food or pesticides in the last ten years,” said ‘The Fear Profiteers’, “chances are Fenton Communications played a key role in provoking that fear. The fears just don’t ever stop. But they all have one thing in common—a lack of evidence and abundance of deceit.”

The anti-BPA propaganda that has been put in motion is multiplied by the countless journalists who simply repeat the lies, accounting for some of the most meretricious misinformation on a daily basis. This in turn is multiplied by the seemingly endless blogs and alleged “health” websites that repeat and repeat it, primarily targeting expectant and new mothers. Another favorite target are men who are told BPA affects their sex drive.

The problem for everyone, everywhere in the world, occurs when governments or entities such as the European Union ban the use of BPA despite overwhelming evidence of its safe use. That puts everyone at risk for the food-related illnesses that occur when containers no longer have the protection that BPA provides.

Alan 's work has a sense of timelessness about it, so anyone perusing these articles in the future will find them equally insightful as they were when originally written. For Alan's latest thoughts go to his blog, Warning Signs. For his past works go to The National Anxiety Center. I would also recommend reading his last book, Right Answers.

Earth Hour may be losing steam as novelty wears off
More Canadian municipalities are pledging to power down Saturday for Earth Hour, but an expert says interest in the event may already be fizzling. Earth Hour has "done a great job of capturing the imagination of an awful lot of people around the world" to raise awareness of climate change issues, said Mark . But "just more of the same gets old fast," he said Friday, noting most marketing campaigns will fade after a few years without something new to draw the public's attention…..The challenge now, he said, "is going to be how to sustain, deepen and broaden the momentum of support for climate change-related policies, practices and behaviours."

My Take - Is it possible that people finally realize that this whole thing is a load of horsepucky? True, it captured everyone’s imagination and tickled the fancy of the general public….but did it really do anything worthwhile. Yes, it did! It made people who really are interested, in this and other issues, look to see what the facts really are and they weren’t impressed. That is why it is waning. Once all that warm and fuzzy stuff wears off, the part of society that is fickle, easily led, misinformed and uninformed simply stops paying attention. As for his statement that; The challenge now, he said, "is going to be how to sustain, deepen and broaden the momentum of support for climate change-related policies, practices and behaviours’. The real challenge for these people is to keep some of the people who promoted this stuff (at taxpayer expense) from going to jail. Oh, I’m sure they will find another gimmick to cloud the public’s minds, but as time goes by it may not be as easy as it was a few years ago.

Clean energy’s junk economics
The oxymoron-ish nature of a “left-wing think tank” is on display in the Center for American Progress’ latest pitch for a so-called “clean energy standard”….. What we do know — and this is undisputed — is that electricity from wind and solar sources is so expensive that without government subsidies, it would not exist, let alone compete with fossil fuels. At a Senate hearing last week, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) asked a “clean energy” venture capitalist: “If it wasn’t for the credits you’re receiving, would you be in business?” The answer was no, according to Climatewire. CAP admits as much in its report, citing the success of several “clean energy” welfare programs.

Society has been lied to for so long on this issue that they haven’t been able to connect the dots until now….thanks to the internet. If some economic plan was worth exploring it wouldn’t need government grants to become reality. Businessmen would already be doing it, competing with it, making themselves a bunch money and hiring employees who would in turn get their share of the pie that is commonly known as wages and benefits. And if they wished to invest in the companies they could then become owners. And that is the system they wish to overturn?

The NAS report did nothing of the sort, and in fact validated all of the significant criticisms of McIntyre & McKitrick (M&M) and the Wegman Report:……..Mann uses the 5 rules of propaganda in his defense, including the rule of orchestration: endlessly repeating the same messages in different variations and combinations.

• The rule of simplification: reducing all data to a simple confrontation between 'Good and Bad', 'Friend and Foe'.
• The rule of disfiguration: discrediting the opposition by crude smears and parodies.
• The rule of transfusion: manipulating the consensus values of the target audience for one's own ends.
• The rule of unanimity: presenting one's viewpoint as if it were the unanimous opinion of all right-thinking people: draining the doubting individual into agreement by the appeal of star-performers, by social pressure, and by 'psychological contagion'.
• The rule of orchestration: endlessly repeating the same messages in different variations and combinations.

My Take - In a previous post dealing with Mann’s lawsuit against a scientist who criticized his work (interesting action for a guy who says his work shouldn’t be dragged into the courts by the Attorney General of Virginia) I asked if he really believed in his discredited work. Apparently this is the answer. This kind of reminds me of Clinton who said that it depended on how you defined the word “it” if he lied under oath. This really is the day of Orwellian “newspeak”.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Fanatical environmentalism, vegetarianism, animal rights and public health are four progressive policy initiatives that most people would not readily associate with Hitler and the Nazis. "Unlike Marxism, which declared much of culture and humanity irrelevant to the revolution, National Socialism was holistic," wrote Jonah Goldberg. Indeed, "organic" and "holistic" were the Nazi terms of art for totalitarianism. The Mussolinian vision of everything inside the state, nothing outside the state, was organic-ized by the Nazis. In this sense, the Bavarian cabinet minister Hans Schemm was deadly serious when he said, "National Socialism is applied biology [Darwinism]." .........Hitler repeatedly asserted that there "is no gap between the organic and inorganic worlds." All of this is based on the "Wrong Turn" myth – that during the ancient past the German people took a wrong turn by accepting Christianity, bourgeois morality, logocentrism and forsaking occult paganism, the latter which Hitler and the Nazis viewed as being more organic, holistic and a more authentic way of life.

Tragically, this barbaric cognitive dissonance, this Nazi cult of the organic lives today in American society's obsession with all things organic, "saving the planet," overly protecting animals at human expense … and regulating our sacred constitutional rights into oblivion.

My Take - There can be no doubt that the green movement is a fascist movement. Fascism is the right wing of socialism and communism is the left. Either way, both are strongly based on atheistic views.

"My personal belief is that the moral relativity that has taken hold – again, a device of the political left and intellectual elites – is largely based on the gravitation away from Judeo-Christian ideology. Even those who were not particularly religious used to have an appreciation and respect for that convention as socially stabilizing. Of course, if you can manipulate the truth, you can get people to believe absolutely anything, so that reveals the who-and-why of this phenomenon. And it is easy in this scenario to deny that the social malaise to which this gives rise even exists! So, once again, we have to educate people as to the political and social realities they have been shielded from and/or neatly avoiding for so long." Erik Rush in an interview regarding his book on race. You will notice the intellectual patterns are the same regardless of the issue.

The goal of socialism, from the French Revolution on, has been a total uprooting of Judaic-Christian principles. That is what it really is all about; turning the state into the ultimate moral and intellectual authority for all mankind. In short, the goal is to make the state God. RK

Four communities have rejected "Sustainability" since the first of the year. More will surely follow. To confront sustainability in your community you should learn everything you can about it. More than 600 American communities have entered into agreements with ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives), an international nongovernment organization created by the United Nations. ICLEI-USA was formed in 1995. ICLEI is a tool of both the U.N. and the federal government, used to transform American cities into "Sustainable Communities."

What is, and is not, sustainable is defined in Agenda 21, a 40-chapter document adopted in 1992 by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. This document was translated into domestic policy through the President's Council on Sustainable Development, created in 1993. Originally, the program was promoted as implementing "Local Agenda 21," but soon ran into trouble......

My Take - There a number of links in this article that need to be followed if you truly wish to understand this issue. Jacques Chirac spilled the beans when he said that the Kyoto Accords (global warming) was the first step in global governance. Let's be clear. Environmentalism became the stepchild of socialism. It is now the spearpoint for global governance. RK

Monday, March 28, 2011

With several key votes set for next week on the GOP’s ongoing assault on the Environmental Protection Agency, this new ad gives us a hint on how the left intends to respond — by portraying the GOP push as an assault on children.

So opposition to regulation of the gas we all breathe out is equivalent to feeding babies arsenic. There is no lie the Warmists will not sink to. But their entire case is built on dishonesty so we should not be too surprised. Global warming has long ceased to be a scientific debate. It is now just a Fascist lunge for power on the part of the Green/Left -- John Ray

The ad will run for a week on D.C. cable, suggesting the target audience is Beltway elites and that its goal is to frame the Dem response in Congress.

They claim that; “The Clean Air Act prevented 160,000 early deaths last year, including 230 infants, yet Congress is busy working to prevent the EPA from updating and enforcing standards that would limit toxic pollutants that endanger the public health,” Mike Lux, President of American Family Voices, says. “If we don’t curb those pollutants, they’ll end up in our air, water and food and eventually in our children. Congress needs to let the EPA do its job to protect public health.”

My Take - I am completely convinced from EPA's past claims that they can't for a minute substantiate those figures. The minute that you hear this phrase, It's For the Children", you had better perk up your ears and sharpen your wits, because some greenie group or their handmaidens at the EPA or government are about to take advantage of all of us. Either they are introducing some new piece of legislation based on junk science that will undermine the economy, and destroy individual rights or they are attempting to maintain legislative authority over something they shouldn't have. But one thing is for sure. They don’t have the science on their side or they wouldn’t be working this con. Below are some articles that get to the root of this issue.

Desperate Climate Scientists File Second Lawsuit Against Top Skeptic
Mann, the infamous creator of the now discredited ‘hockey stick’ graph was once the darling of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a tax hungry government funded organization that blames mankind for raising global temperatures by 0.7 degrees during the 20th Century. Now he is desperate to hit back at his critics with the help of Big Green's immense financial resources. Below we examine the shady background of Professor Mann and explain what Ball must do to defeat this latest legal challenge.

The ascent of Mann
Climate Realists has an interesting article (see link below) that looks at the extraordinary rise to prominence of the hockeystickmeister, Michael Mann. This is one of the angles of the hockey stick story that is still something of a mystery - how did such an obscure scientist, one who had just completed his PhD, get to be lead author on the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC?

Mann’s Ph.D ‘Rushed Through’Instantly, Mann was then plucked from obscurity and appointed not just a contributing author for Chapters 7,8,12 of the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (1998-00) but also Lead Author for Chapter 2. And with no track record whatsoever in this field, Mann now with tree ring data thrust into his hand, famously carved out his infamous ‘hockey stick’ graph.

Headline Story: Did a Secret Climate Deal Launch the Hockey Stick Fakery? By John O’Sullivan, guest post at Climate Realists
…………."So what miracle turned this problematic researcher’s life around?
If miracles happened for Mann, they came in the form of Barry Saltzman. You see, this struggling student’s career was transformed the moment Saltzman became his Ph.D adviser. Only after Saltzman applied his influence were Mann’s lofty credentials “rushed through.” Mann then turned himself into a makeshift tree ring counter, and overnight became the iconic figure in the IPCC Third Report (2001). The rest is history, as they say."........If my name were Ken Cuccinelli I would want to chase down one or two grant and funding sources; with proof of collusion a case for fraud holds water. That's treble damages and Virginia’s taxpayers will be sitting $1.5 million better off plus expenses.

My Take - Normally I wouldn’t pay any attention to something such as this because on the surface it appears to be nothing except an ad hominem attack…normally that is. Except there seems to be a pattern here. I have already linked the article about, The Strange Case of Sari Kovats, which places another unknown, unqualified and unpublished “scientist” in a position of enormous responsibility. Why? Is it because qualified scientists wouldn’t have gone along with this fraud? Maybe, except scientific fraud is so common I doubt that they couldn’t find someone corrupt enough to go along. Perhaps this was easier though. Take someone with nothing to lose and make them special, make them important and famous. Someone easy to convince. Someone who perhaps really didn’t have what it takes to be those things on their own.

Dr. John Costello writes, “Climategate has shattered that myth (the myth of global warming). It gives us a peephole into the work of the scientists investigating possibly the most important issue ever to face mankind. Instead of seeing large collaborations of meticulous, careful, critical scientists, we instead see a small team of incompetent cowboys, abusing almost every aspect of the framework of science to build a fortress around their ‘old boys club’, to prevent real scientists from seeing the shambles of their research. Most people are aghast that this could have happened; and it is only because climate science exploded from a relatively tiny corner of academia into a hugely funded industry in a matter of mere years that the perpetrators were able to get away with it for so long.”

What fascinates me about Mann’s lawsuit is that he has to know that when you sue someone…everyone is deposed…that means he has to come forth with all the stuff he has been refusing to come forward with. You must answer the questions asked. Which makes me wonder; does he believe that his work isn’t fraudulent? Does he actually believe that his work can stand up to honest peer review? Does he honestly believe that he can win? Is this a case of desperate delusion? It does seem clear though that "he knows even less about law than he does about science."

Many ‘scientists’ are going down the tubes over this, and some of them will pay for their fraud financially and it would be nice to see some end up in jail. After all, fraud isn’t just a civil offence, it is a criminal offense. That would help with the fact that “corruption among scientists is actually quite common. According to official statistics 40 percent of scientists have witnessed such conduct but do not report it.” As for Cuccinelli's civil case against Mann, that could end up being a criminal case;

The IPCC has been shown to be thoroughly corrupt; but then again it is part of the United Nations, so what can we expect? Mann's pinnacle work, The Hockey Stick Graph, has been shown to be fraudulent, and it seems impossible to believe that this was anything less that deliberate, and Hansen’s work was shown to have easily discoverable mathematical “errors” .So would someone please explain to me why people still quote them?

Let's get this right once and for all. Scientific integrity is an oxymoron, we can no longer trust these people. We need to start questioning everything they say and do; especially if it involves environmental issues. Especially since we are paying them for their expertise. The least we should expect is that it would not be corrupt; but then again they do so much work for the EPA; so what can we expect? RK

_______________________Quote of the Week_________________________

Phil Jones' Feb 21, 2005 response to Warwick Hughes' request for his raw climate data: "We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?" Looking for things that might be wrong with a given conclusion is of course central to science, its called peer review. If something isn't peer reviewed it isn't science. Warmism is junk science and junk science cannot stand such scrutiny. Paraphrased quote from John Ray.

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Kool: ACSH on controversial menthol ban in WebMD
Following a report issued by the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) last week claiming that a menthol cigarette ban would be beneficial to public health, journalist Denise Mann revisits the issue in her article for WebMD, "Are Menthol Cigarettes Riskier Than Non-Menthol?" FDA has a fractured bone to pick with long-term ulcer drugs
For those over the age of 50 taking prescription proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), the FDA warns that using these medications for over a year increases the risk of bone fractures.Report: Nothing Fishy About Mercury
It's time to hit the seafood buffet as a new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine confirms what we knew all along: exposure to mercury in fish has no clinically adverse effect on cardiovascular disease.Simply preventing a million diarrhea deaths
Though not an endemic problem in the U.S., diarrhea remains a common life-threatening event in third-world countries, killing about 1.4 million children under the age of five every year.

My Take - The greenies are always howling about how we have to go back to nature and get all of these terrible chemicals out of our water if we really want good health. Baloney! If that was so great....why don't they live there and take their children with them. Chlorine in the water supply has been one of the greatest health benefits the world has ever known, and the greenies keep proving it over and over again. When they convinced leaders in South American to eliminate chlorine from the public water supplies hundreds died and tens of thousands were sickened. And they weren't prosecuted. That is one solution to this diarrhea problem. Prosecute these activists that are preventing modern advancements in these countries. Or better yet. Prosecute then and make them live there under the same conditions they have imposed on these people.

Will rationing supercede America’s healthcare legacy?
Is the U.S. moving towards health care rationing? Dr. Gil Ross states; "We all like to think of America as a land of opportunity, a place where people are free to make their own choices in matters large and small. That's why it's so disturbing to see American regulators moving to restrict the treatment options of women suffering from advanced-stage "triple-negative" breast cancer, the most difficult type to treat - and doing so at the same time European regulators are reinforcing the choices available for treatment."

My Take - There are a couple of things that bother me about this. First, I don't place a great deal of confidence in 'meta-analysis'. It has a place, but that place shouldn't be in the first seat. Another thing that desturbs me are all the reports about how this works on infants and animals, which would not constitute a 'placebo effect'. Are those reports false? I don't know! But I never heard contrary comments when this has been discussed.

The last thing that disturbs me is that an entire area of the world (about 25% of the worlds population) buys into this and has done so for centuries. China isn't a singular nation. It is as varied as its food. There is a substantial difference in languages in China also, although I do think they can all speak Mandarin. How do you convince such a varied population that something that doesn't work..... works? I have never had acupuncture performed on me, and I don't intend to start, in spite of the continuous pain I am in. I don't embrace it because it just seems too voodooish to me and I put it much in the same category as faith healers.However, in this case…. I don't dismiss it out of hand either.

______________________________________________________________ If there is a health scare today, the American Council on Science and Health will most likely have the answer by tomorrow; and for members it will appear in your e-mail. No effort on your part, except to read the answer. All that the ACSH is interested in are the facts and they are prepared to follow them wherever they lead. Who can ask for more? Please Donate Now!

This first appeared here on Dec. 4, 2007. I know that it would seem that posting this later in the year would be more applicable, but with all of this clean air hullabaloo going on with the EPA, the greenies, the administration and people in leadership whose sanity should be questioned, I thought this more clearly outlines how impossible it is to please these people. Of course....it’s just one less candle. But what of all the tomorrows that follow? RK

In a campaign that has spread like wildfire across the Internet, a group of Israeli environmentalists is encouraging Jews around the world to light at least one less candle this Hanukka to help the environment.

The founders of the Green Hanukkia campaign found that every candle that burns completely produces 15 grams of carbon dioxide. If an estimated one million Israeli households light for eight days, they said, it would do significant damage to the atmosphere.

It never ceases to amaze me. I have a friend, John Brignell, whose website, NumberWatch, has a page devoted to all the things attributed to global warming. There are easily more than 600 or so, but every single day the Greens come forth with one more totally idiotic thing everyone should or should not do to avoid global warming.

They can stop now. There is NO global warming beyond the perfectly natural warming that has been occurring since the end of the last mini-ice age around 1850. Nor is there any dramatic increase in the so-called temperature of the earth.

Telling Jews not to light all the candles to celebrate Hanuka is the same kind of insulting hogwash that afflicts Christians who are abused for putting out some Christmas lights.

Alan’s work has a sense of timelessness about it, so anyone perusing these articles in the future will find them equally insightful as they were when originally written. For Alan's latest thoughts go to his blog, Warning Signs. For his past works go to The National Anxiety Center. I would also recommend reading his last book, Right Answers.

Former Republican EPA administrators William Ruckelshaus and Christine Todd Whitman authored the op-ed below that appeared in today’s Washington Post. Ruckelshaus’ unjustified ban of DDT in 1972 has led to the deaths of tens of millions of Africans. Whitman is an airhead — at the time she was appointed as EPA administrator, she actually didn’t know the difference between global warming and ozone depletion. When an interviewer asked for her views on the state of global warming science in December 2000, Whitman replied, “Clearly, there’s a hole in the ozone, but I saw a study the other day that showed that that was closing.”

My Take - I remember Whitman as EPA administrator, and how she whined when she found out this wasn’t a very nice job if you bucked the greenies. That’s why her term is only for 2001-2003….she couldn’t wait to get out. What was she thinking; how brain dead could she have been? So now they trot out these two to defend the EPA. They meow all the right warm and cuddly sounds, but here is a bit of reality from a real scientist….who actually helped create the EPA and helped in their foundational legislation. See what his views are on the EPA today. Please read, An Interview with Dr. Jay Lehr, Defender of Our Industry.

The Toxic Substances Control Act needs to be updated, and since there may not be much progress in Congress, states are taking the issue upon themselves, creating a complicated regulatory landscape, said American Chemistry Council President and CEO Cal Dooley.

“The lack of certainty makes it difficult for companies that produce and use chemicals to operate efficiently and diverts resources from investment and hiring to managing duplicative and inconsistent regulatory requirements,” Dooley said at the opening of the GlobalChem conference.

My Take- I have been amazed at this trend from an organization that one would think would be opposed to more regulations. The number of pages added to the Federal Register, which lists all new regulations, reached a high of 78,090 in 2007, up from 64,438 in 2001. Over 25% of all federal regulations are environmental regulations. I would like to know exactly what regulations imposed by the federal government doesn’t already cover all of these issues? In over 78,000 pages of regulations what could they have possibly missed?

Generally when a large organization such as the ACC demands more government oversight of an industry it means that the largest companies will be in a position to drive smaller competitors out of the market. This pattern started when Whiskey Act was passed in 1791 by large distillers in the cities to force farmers to stop making and selling corn liquor. It was true when tobacco companies settled the lawsuits with the states attorneys general forcing the smaller companies to remain small, The agreement allowed the tobacco companies to pass any fines on to consumers, making them a partner with the states and these “fines” now became, in reality, excise taxes. Who was the biggest supporter of that action? Phillip Morris. I seriously doubt that this situation is any different now.

I have no doubt that this will not benefit the nation or the small businesses involved in chemical manufacturing, distribution or application. Since I know someone who knows Mr. Dooley and he tells me he is a sharp guy, I can’t doubt his intelligence, so I have to wonder as to his (and his organization’s) motives. I receive their newsletter and I have found, based on some of their positions, that I have absolutely no confidence in these people at all.

The ACC reminds me entirely too much of Crop Life America who has taken positions against pesticides that are bereft of long term vision as to the consequence of those decisions and can only be construed as self serving to the largest manufacturers. The fact that the EPA is so hot for passage is a good enough reason not to be hot for it.

One large company really gets it though. I am so pleased to report that Dow is now upset at the EPA’s junk science rationale regarding their fumigant ProFume (Sulfuryl Fluoride). I wish to commend them for this principled stand. They may now be coming to the industry asking for support for their position. Great! I am all for that!

Since this is an issue of principle, i.e. junk science, and not an economic issue, let’s first start with first things first - overturning the Montreal Protocol; another piece of junk science that would have never become law if the internet had existed in those days. That way we can get methyl bromide back. After Dow has worked with everyone on that, I have no doubt that we will have time to enthusiastically work on the Sulfuryl Fluoride issue, and we will have momentum on our side. I congratulate Dow AgroSciences for their vision and determination and look forward to this challenge to fight against junk science regulations. Clearly they realize that this kind of thing has long term implications everyone will eventually have to face.

"When," humorist P.J. O’Rourke has asked, "can we quit passing laws and raising taxes? When can we say of our political system, ‘Stick a fork in it, it’s done’?... The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop."

Alas for O’Rourke and those who sympathize with him, the project of contemporary liberalism is never done. You might look upon the vast expansion of the regulatory state over the past couple of decades and conclude that government could afford to take a breather—maybe even a three-day weekend. Wrong. To the liberal or progressive eye, the remarkable thing is not how much government does—but how much it has yet to do…….

Considerations such as these seem to carry little weight with fans of the regulatory state such as The Washington Post’s Harold Meyerson—who noted, in the wake of the once-in-a-millennium tsunami that has devastated Japan, that "we haven’t defeated risk." Once we have—presumably after the Rapture comes—then maybe the expansion of the regulatory state can throttle down. Until then, this much is clear: If O’Rourke wants to stick a fork in anything, he better have a permit.

Saturday, March 26, 2011

The American Lung Association strongly opposes Chairman Fred Upton, Senator James Inhofe, and Representative Ed Whitfield’s bill that would block the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) authority to update clean air standards. If passed by Congress, this legislation would interfere with EPA’s ability to implement the Clean Air Act; a law that prevents tens of thousands of adverse health effects caused by air pollution, including asthma attacks, heart attacks and even premature death each year. A report released earlier this week by EPA found that cutting pollution through the Clean Air Act will save $2 trillion by 2020 and prevent at least 230,000 deaths annually…..The article goes on to say;

“The enactment of the Upton-Inhofe-Whitfield bill would strip away sensible Clean Air Act protections that safeguard Americans and their families from air pollution. Americans have these protections because over the past 40 years Congressional leaders of both parties worked together to protect the lives and health of their constituents. We strongly urge Congress to reject this approach and support the continued implementation of this vital law.”

OK, let’s explore this a bit. Apparently there is a link between the EPA and the American Lung Association. This gets really Machiavellian as it goes along, because of the Cap and Trade initiatives promoted by the Greenies; the administration and many in Congress are all part of this story. If this were a fiction novel, would it be believable?

“EPA regulation of carbon dioxide could destroy 2.5 million jobs by 2030 and lower the average American household income by $1,200 a year. And, while emissions regulation is expected to increase energy prices, a new study by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity found that lower-to-middle-class families are already paying much more for energy than they did just a decade ago -- a 12 percent to 20 percent increase of after-tax income, for example, for a family earning less than $50,000 a year.”

The author goes on to say;

“According to the EPA's online Grant Awards Database, the American Lung Association of Michigan received $78,000 from the EPA over the past decade. Grants to the Association and its affiliates during that time total over $20 million.”

There so many underlying issues here that it is hard to know where to start. First of all, the activists are always making absolute and unbending demands on exposing links between companies and those who have received money from them, even if that money was for work performance.

Michael Fumento went through this over a grant he took from Monsanto, and then went on to write a book about the value of bio-tech. Because he didn’t disclose that piece of information every time he opened his mouth he was vilified. In effect they imposed a new level of rules retroactively.

I have mixed emotions about this, because grant money is now the “golden calf” of science. Not truth. On the other hand, who is going to pay for all the research and development if it isn’t done by companies? On the other hand, when the EPA shells out grant money it is because they already have a conclusion….they just need someone to provide some data to support it. Time has now shown that Anthropogenic Climate Change is a classic example of “scientific integrity being an oxymoron” as a result of government grant money.

Here is the rub. Why is it the greenies aren’t outraged that the EPA has seemingly bought and paid for the American Lung Association’s intrusion into this arena?

Another issue that is highlighted in this article is the idea that the EPA should be promoting and funding anything. They aren’t a Department. They are an agency, supposedly, under the Department of the Interior and, supposedly, under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior. The article makes this cogent observation;

"Transferring regulatory authority back to elected lawmakers merely stops a radical agenda at the EPA that will raise energy prices. Carbon dioxide is what we exhale -- it doesn't cause cancer or acid rain," said Borelli. "This is not the American Lung Association's fight, and their intervention -- in light of receiving EPA funding -- also questions the intent."

Is it the duties and responsibilities of an agency is to enforce laws passed by the Congress; or is it their duty to ignore Congress, ignore science, ignore the impact of their regulations, and impose regulations, that in point of fact, become de-facto laws. Oh, by the way. Does anyone know how they came up with figures that the “Clean Air Act will save $2 trillion by 2020 and prevent at least 230,000 deaths annually”? The EPA has been known to make this stuff up before (the EPA calls this stuff “assumptions”), but what about the American Lung Association? I am told there is no basis for that claim.

John Ray makes this observation.

"It seems reasonable that heavy air pollution has adverse health effects of some kind but the situation is not as clear cut as one might think. I know the research literature on that rather well and have often critiqued it on my FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC blog.

In summary: Evidence from human studies in the Western world is very equivocal -- consisting of epidemiological speculation based on weak relationships in studies that do not control for important potential confounders. But that literature focuses on particulate pollution -- and CO2 is a gas, not a particle. And the idea that CO2 -- which we all produce and breathe out -- might be damaging to health is simply laughable."

Scientists know that vaccines don't, but the idea lingers everywhere -- on talk shows and blogs and in conversations between parents and their child's pediatrician. It lingers because many people in this country and elsewhere think that vaccines just might not be good for us……

As both Offit and Mnookin note, the idea that vaccines are dangerous is not a new belief. It has been around for as long as vaccines have existed. Offit is clearest in explaining the underlying paradox: The belief that vaccines are bad for us is enhanced by their success. Men and women in their 50s and younger have no real memory of polio. Their children and grandchildren have had no experience with measles or rubella. As kids, my generation used to fear tetanus, which we were sure led to slow starvation because our jaws would lock shut midsentence, but I haven't met any children with this phobia in decades. I vividly remember my daughters' disbelief when reading Little House on the Prairie that Mary could go blind from scarlet fever.

All these obscure diseases have, like the bubonic plague, been banished to faraway places or distant pasts, and people in the United States have forgotten all about them. So they have naturally forgotten that these diseases can also lead to blindness, paralysis, brain damage, or death. Offit is brilliant at pointing out the absurdity of anti-vaccine activists' argument that vaccines are superfluous because they prevent us from catching diseases that people no longer catch………….

Whether sudden or not, the regression is terrifying for parents. For many of them (but not all), the temporal simultaneity of the vaccine and the descent into autism cannot be just a chance event. It seems the vaccine caused their child's autism. As pointed out in the Vaccine Court Omnibus Hearings, beautifully described by Offit, the fact that experts can identify an array of developmental abnormalities in children from video taken well before their MMR vaccine, which neither parents nor pediatricians could see because they are not trained to do so, doesn't matter to parents looking for causes.

My Take - This is such an emotional issue that I have found it impossible to explain to parents who are going through this that this isn’t really what they think it is. I have friends who are living this tragedy....and it is impossible to reason with them; I no longer try.

They have finally found the answer....and Hollywood stars confirm it...vaccinations caused this tragedy and no amount of scientific study will change their views. One family I know is so sure that all chemicals are part of this problem that they have gone over completely to the dark side of green, even to the point of feeding their children unpasteurized milk, a known danger. I blame the media for this entirely. We have always had this kind of thing in society, but we never had such a group of hyperventilating talking heads blathering nonsense 24/7 before. And society will suffer for it. And they will go their happy way oblivious to the path of devastation they have wrought. And no one will be charged with crimes against humanity. Why? Because they never have to pay the penalty for being wrong! That penalty is paid by others, like the children whose parents will not vaccinate their children, believing they are protecting them. That is the real heartbreak! RK

Please read the comments below the article. They clearly show how this argument goes back and forth, but the real test is this; everything we are told whould bear some resemblance to what we see going on in society. One commentor made a factual observation about the realities of the of autism in society, and then attemted to show the logical fallacy to this kind of thinking....I dont' think very well, but the point is correct.

"Unvaccinated = unautistic." First, that's just false: in Japan, where the MMR vaccine was withdrawn in 1993, autism rates have continued to rise just like in other countries. Similarly in Denmark. Second, there's also no such thing as a person who never wore clothes who is autistic. Unclothed = unautistic. Therefore, clothing must cause autism, right? This type of reasoning is known as a "fallacy."

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

My picks today are designed to try and open everyone’s eyes to the fact that there is absolutely no need to believe that energy has to be expensive or rationed. Both are concepts which are readily embraced by the greenies, and fit their irrational and misanthropic worldview. If you haven’t figured it out yet, let me help…. going green is a suicide pact. First off….oil isn’t a fossil fuel. Those who have been reading Green Notes and Paradigms and Demographics know that I subscribe to the abyssal abiotic theory of petroleum, meaning that oil is a substance created in the Earth’s crust and continually works its way to the surface .... and doesn’t come from dinosaurs. There are untold amounts of oil everywhere. RK

The Coming Shale Oil Revolution - The Times, 21 March 2011
THE JOKE has been told by generations of Jews, most famously Golda Meir, the former prime minister of Israel: 'Why did Moses lead us to the one place in the Middle East without oil?' But an updated version may be required if Harold Vinegar and his colleagues get their way. Dr Vinegar, the former chief scientist of Royal Dutch Shell, is at the centre of an ambitious project to turn Israel into one of the world's leading oil producers. Israel Energy Initiatives, where Dr Vinegar is chief scientist, is working on projects to extract oil and natural gas from oil shale from a 238sq km area of the Shfela Basin, to the south and west of Jerusalem.

Matt Ridley: Does A Different Nuclear Power Lie Ahead? The Wall Street Journal, 19 March 2011
Might the Fukushima accident eventually create a chance for the nuclear industry to "reboot"? In recent years some have begun to argue that solid-fuel uranium reactors like the ones in Japan are an outdated technology that deserves to peter out and be replaced by an entirely different kind of nuclear energy that will be both safer and cheaper. The problem, as is often the case in capital-intensive industries, is inertia. Nearly all the expertise, research and sunk costs are in the old technology. Fukushima just might start to change that.

In the short run, the beneficiary of nuclear's now inevitable crisis is going to be fossil fuels. Renewable energy remains too expensive, too land-hungry, too unreliable and too small-scale to take up much slack, so cheap coal and newly abundant natural gas will do the job….. Nobody knows if thorium reactors can compete on price with coal and gas. India has been working on thorium for some years, but the technology is as different from today's nuclear power as gas is from coal, and very few nuclear engineers even hear about liquid fuel during their training, let alone get to work on it.

New technologies always struggle to compete with well-entrenched rivals whose costs are already sunk. The first railways couldn't rival canals on cost or reliability, let alone lobbying power. Now is the time to start to find out about thorium's potential.

###

My Take - So I have to ask. Why is the President of the United States telling the Brazilians how much we need their oil? Within the jurisdiction of the United States there is enough oil, natural gas and coal to fulfill our needs for 200 years, and new technologies are on the horizon. Of course that would mean defying the greenies, who hated nuclear, then loved it and then hated it again. They loved ethanol then hated it. They loved solar, then hated it. They loved wind energy, then hated it. Why is it that the greenies are always in love with technology that doesn't exist and then hate it as soon as it has the potential to become reality? What exactly is it they want? They want us all to commit suicide. So why are we listening to these people? RK

Sunday, March 20, 2011

In 1994, Kovats was one of only 21 people in the entire world selected to work on the first IPCC chapter that examined how climate change might affect human health. She was 25 years old. Her first academic paper wouldn't be published for another three years. It would be six years before she'd even begin her doctoral studies and 16 years before she'd graduate…..So when are Kovats, the IPCC, and the British government all going to admit that she is far from being a world-class scientific expert? Will she resign her position as coordinating lead author - or will the new edition of the climate bible be irretrievably tainted by her participation?

My Take - Scientific integrity is an oxymoron! There is a lot of stuff between these two paragraphs that you may find amazing. Probably the thing I find most amazing is that so many are amazed at these exposures. I don’t find any of this amazing because it was obvious to me, and many others, that the IPCC was founded in corruption in the beginning, it is foundering in corruption now, and will eventually collapse under the weight of its corruption.

The only difference between when it was formed and now; is that now everyone knows, at least for those who actaully care about that which is truthful. The important thing to realize is this; when someone so far from the center of information as I am can see what is going on, this question must be asked; how can leaders in the political, scientific and journalistic realms not see what is going on, or not report truthfully what is going on? Apparently corruption is ubiquitous.

From the very beginning it was obvious that the claims of the IPCC would fail the test of history. Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality. I have said this often in the past and nothing that I have seen has changed my mind; everything you see on the news, everything you read in the newspapers and everything you learned in school is a lie. Not necessarily lies of commission, although they are guilty of that also, but mostly lies of omission. If scientists won’t practice the first rule of science, De Omnibus Dubitandum, then ordinary people must do so, questioning everything, including them…..especially them. RK

Like much of the world, our family has been riveted by the tragedies in Japan over the past week, and we've been closely following the unfolding disasters. But one aspect of the Japanese reaction to the catastrophes has impressed me deeply.

My Take - Patrice Lewis is one of my favorite commentators. Focusing on values, she shares her observations on the real world involving family, education, religion, friends, personal conduct, personal respnsibility...... and her farm; This isn't a "green issues only" article, but I liked it and thought it was worth the read. RK

The Golden State's residents rated their quality of life at its lowest mark in almost 20 years, citing the economic downturn and stagnant personal finances, according to a joint UC Berkeley and Field Poll. "Residents are reconsidering the image of the Golden State and showing more ambivalence toward it," said Jack Citrin, a Berkeley political science professor who co-wrote the report. "The changes going on - socially, culturally, economic - have made people here less Pollyannaish about the reality of life here."

My Take - Is anyone really surprised at this? California has a population filled with an idiotic level of greenie stupidity fogging their minds; an unbroken line of stupid governors; a plethora of clueless legislators, and worse yet.....they suffer a plague of maniacal green activists demanding even more of the greenie insanity that is destroying the state; yet 39% still think that California is "one of the best places to live," I would love to know the demographics and general intelligence of this group.

The thing that worries me is the fact that so many businesses are leaving California for states with a much higher level of sanity. I'm worried because I am afraid they will take the insane values that is destroying California with them and infect normal people. RK

Saturday, March 19, 2011

They obediently did the bidding of the Fascists and now they are obediently doing the bidding of the eco-Fascists -- again with destructive results. They are again a warning to us all…….When it comes to the environment these days, all other interests must take a back seat…. After all, the United Nations has proclaimed that ensuring environmental sustainability is one of its "millennium goals," and greater importance is assigned to climate negotiations among the big industrial nations than to economic summits these days…….There is no issue that produces such unanimity among the parties. A proposal to increase tax credits for employees led to weeks of political debate, while the 2009 European Union ban on conventional light bulbs was approved without a single debate in parliament. As soon as the word environment is mentioned in any policy initiatives, all discussion becomes redundant.

My Take - Green activists have taken non-problems and turned them into crises. As a result they have taken these non-crises and turned them into legitimate environmental problems that are worse than whatever it was they were protesting. Alternative energy of every sort is the perfect example. Since they have no command and control structure, they can be for and against something at the same time and still be right. That makes it convenient for them to continue down the same irresponsible path without deviation because everything they do is an act of faith that can’t be questioned.
The scientists supporting the green movement have sold their integrity for fame and government grant money. Because of the lies these people have told over the years they have made the term “scientific integrity” an oxymoron. And Anthropogenic Climate Change is the apex of this kind of insidious, larcenous fraud that has been perpetrated on the world’s population….to mankind’s detriment. It is clear that all of the programs promoted by the greenies will ultimately be detrimental to mankind as a whole, not just in the third world, as has been the case thus far. I often wonder if these "scientists" have children and grand children. Do they somehow think they will escape the insane policies they themselves promote? It must be clear to the most casual observer that no one will escape the consequences of this green madness. I have to ask; are they sane?

If ever any group of scientists should be prosecuted….they should be among the first. Soon I will miss being called a “denier”, because everyone will be a “denier”, and then we will be the consensus. Benjamin Franklin said; "Truth will very patiently wait for us."

It is imperative to be right when you take a stand. It is critical to stay the course no matter how many times you are criticized or how many times you lose because eventually the tide will turn and you will be in the lead. If you are right that is. If not....apologize, change your position and move on. That is the difference between a greenie and normal people. Being green means never having to say you're sorry.

This week's news has been totally dominated by the nuclear accident in Japan. It is clear that the Japanese build amazingly safe plants; after all....it withstood a category 9 earthquake without fault. They just didn't plan on a tidal wave hitting at the same time. The backup power system was the cause of the failure because the tidal wave destroyed the generators that would have supplied power to the cooling system. I hardly paid any attention to it! Why?

Now let's take this reality to heart. Those who say there is no safe level of radiation are lying. Let me say this once again. Those who say that there is no such thing as a safe level of radiation are lying. We have already known this for years and in point of fact people working in nuclear plants don't have unusual health problems, they actually have less and, if I remember this correctly, live longer. What happened after Chernobyl clearly demonstrates that all the hype, irrational claims of massive health problems and early death in surrounding communities and countries was nothing more that environmental scare tactics?

Ann Coulter wrote about “a $10 million Department of Energy study from 1991 examined 10 years of epidemiological research by the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health on 700,000 shipyard workers, some of whom had been exposed to 10 times more radiation than the others from their work on the ships' nuclear reactors. The workers exposed to excess radiation had a 24 percent lower death rate and a 25 percent lower cancer mortality than the non-irradiated workers.” She found this to be absolutely incredible! She went on to say; “Isn't that just incredible? I mean, that the Department of Energy spent $10 million doing something useful? Amazing, right?”

She went on to point out that Mother Nature has been the biggest killer in this whole affair….something that we all should start remembering. Nature will kill anyone or anything that isn’t prepared to defend itself against it. In order to survive mankind must alter our environment or cease to exist. And that is what "going green" really means. This horsepucky about returning to nature is a death wish, and if that is someone else's goal in life for themselves.....I say that its none of my business.

However, I really dislike it when they attempt to impose it on me. Then again, the greenies have stated over and over again that they believe mankind is the planet's worst virus and needs to be wiped out. They also embrace politicies that would at the very least cause terrible harm to humanity. So when they tell us to adopt their policies because it’s for the children; why should we believe them?

Enjoy this week's offerings!

Anti-chemical zealot cites evidence that pesticides don’t cause cancer in his own report
As chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition and Emeritus professor of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein is also known as an environmental radical, who in his most recent report titled "More Interested in Accumulating Wealth Than Saving Lives," accuses the American Cancer Society (ACS) of conflicts of interest and indifference to cancer prevention.

In the wake of a back-to-back 9.0 earthquake and tsunami, Japan is working tirelessly to rescue thousands of missing and injured residents and repair its ravaged neighborhoods. Now, many are also worrying over the potential for radiation emission from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant reactors that experienced cooling and pressure problems as a result of the natural disaster.

Japan’s road to recovery
Following the devastation of Japan's magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the nation is fighting to maintain a semblance of stability and order as ominous newspaper headlines warn of a potential meltdown at the Fukushima plants.

Surgeon General Benjamin gives toxic advice
While we still don't know the true extent of the radiation threat from the Japanese nuclear reactors damaged during the historically unprecedented earthquake and tsunami, there is one thing we do know - U.S. Surgeon General Regina Benjamin needs a refresher course in medicine.

Low-radiation heart scan hopefully not a scam
A meta-analysis of 16 studies published in the Annals of Internal Medicine finds that low-radiation heart CT scans, known as gated CT's, are equally effective in diagnosing heart problems as a coronary angiography, the current gold standard.

A defense against anti-DDT bloggers
Last month, we reported on a study by Drs. Donald Roberts and Richard Tren of Africa Fighting Malaria on the life-saving anti-malaria benefits of DDT spraying. Predictably, the study received harsh but misguided criticism from frequent anti-DDT blogger Tim Lambert.

Bupropion not likely to help folks kick the habit
In a new study on smoking cessation published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, researchers sought to assess the safety and efficacy of bupropion, the active ingredient in the antidepressant Wellbutrin and the smoking cessation aid Zyban.Correction to yesterday’s Dispatch on teens’ mentholated cigarette smoking
ACSH would like to issue a correction to yesterday's Dispatch item regarding the FDA's Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) draft report, which noted the incidence of mentholated cigarette smoking among American teens.Leave Heigl alone, vaping never hurt anyone
Haters of the e-cigarette are quick to chastise actress Kathryn Heigl for continuing to vape nine months after switching from traditional cigarettes.High-intensity smokers taking it easy
Though the rate of smoking among U.S. adults has remained relatively stagnant over the past few years - hovering around 20 percent as reported by the CDC in September - there is still some good news to be had.Rango smokes up the box office
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is fuming over the latest animation flick Rango, featuring the voice of Johnny Depp as a desert town chameleon, stating that the depiction of smoking in the PG-rated movie will encourage younger audiences to think the habit is appealing.

Don’t sing the mythical pregnancy blues
It is often observed that upon becoming pregnant, women radiate a certain glow. Well, that extra shine may actually be a sign of stress-induced perspiration that moms-to-be suffer after getting bombarded with a litany of pregnancy do's and don'ts.

Another light at the end of the tunnel: Stem cells for congestive heart failureYesterday, ACSH reported on an early-stage, small trial of a new gene therapy for Parkinson's disease that could eventually lead to better cutting-edge therapies. Now we bring you news of another promising innovation - the use of bone marrow stem cells for repairing damaged hearts in patients with congestive heart failure.

______________________________________________________________ If there is a health scare today, the American Council on Science and Health will most likely have the answer by tomorrow; and for members it will appear in your e-mail. No effort on your part, except to read the answer. All that the ACSH is interested in are the facts and they are prepared to follow them wherever they lead. Who can ask for more? Please Donate Now!

Thursday, March 17, 2011

The Ohio Republican wrestles with the budget.
The Republican Study Committee (RSC) is the most important organization in Washington you’ve never heard of. Its new leader is a former wrestling champion, and he’s one reason its influence is surging. Jim Jordan, 47, was elected RSC chairman in December after winning his third term in the House of Representatives from northwestern Ohio. He says the RSC’s role is simply “to push for conservative things.” This means policies—on spending, the deficit, and the national debt especially—more conservative than those Republican leaders in Congress are inclined to favor.

House leaders scarcely knew what hit them in their first clash with the RSC under Jordan. They had proposed to cut 2011 spending by considerably less than the $100 billion Republican candidates had talked about in the 2010 campaign. At a meeting of the 241-member Republican conference on February 9, the RSC rebelled......

Since this is a green issues only blog this normally this wouldn't appear here, except that this plays directly into the green issues facing everyone. Cuts are way over due, but it isn't cuts alone that will start that engine known as the American economy back in motion. If that were the case all those socialist societies that failed wouldn't have. Below are two articles that I believe deal with this. RK

The EPA's Fantastic Clean Air Fictions
Reading the Environmental Protection Agency’s news releases is a trip into the world of science fiction, of fantastical assertions and predictions that have no relationship to reality. The EPA is a most wicked assemblage of alleged scientists and political appointees whose sole purpose is to economically burden the industrial, commercial, and agricultural sectors of the nation in every way possible.

Most reporters covering environmental issues these days are so brainwashed and brain dead they never actually question the drivel that the EPA shovels on a daily basis. The latest is a March 16 release “EPA Proposes First National Standard for Mercury Pollution from Power Plants.” The key words here are “power plants”, the 24/7 generators of the electricity we all depend upon.

Obama's Endless Energy Lies
For anyone who follows energy issues, the President’s press conference on Friday was a breathtaking example of his ability and willingness to lie about America’s energy needs and reserves while obfuscating his administration’s relentless attacks on the nation’s coal and oil industries.

Even if we give Obama the benefit of the doubt by saying he is being “misinformed” by advisors, it does not alter the fact that he has, since the days of his campaign in 2008, made no secret of his intention to undermine America’s oil and coal industries while encouraging greater use of the two forms of energy, wind and solar power, that are of the least value in the real world. Neither would exist without massive tax incentives and subsidies or mandates that require their use. Obama’s lies are so easily refuted one might think he would hesitate to tell them, but he is undeterred by the truth.

There are a number of things that could have a wonderful effect on the economy, but none of them as powerful as drilling for oil, gas and mining for coal......and building refineries. This would act like ether injected into a stalled engine. RK

A defense against anti-DDT bloggers
Last month, we reported on a study by Drs. Donald Roberts and Richard Tren of Africa Fighting Malaria on the life-saving anti-malaria benefits of DDT spraying. Predictably, the study received harsh but misguided criticism from frequent anti-DDT blogger Tim Lambert. Below is an excerpt from Dr. Roberts’ published counter-argument to Lambert’s “outrageous commentary [attempting] to claim our data were wrong:” Lambert recently posted a commentary on our peer-reviewed scientific paper investigating false claims made by UNEP and GEF about insecticide-free malaria control interventions in Mexico and Central America, accessible here.

The objection I have with so many of these anti-chemical pro-greenie types is their lack of consistency and difficulty having a close relationship with truth. With the greenies the story is always the same. It is either lies of commission or lies of omission. RK

About Me

Green is a mixture of blue and yellow. That is the only factual definition of green that will stand the test of time. After that; any other definition is a corruption of a perfectly nice color. I have been an exterminator for 35 years. I have served as a trustee on industry association boards representing pesticide and fertilizer applicators actively for almost 25 years. I believe that what we do isn't just a job; it's a mission! We are that thin gray line that mans the wall telling the world; "no one will harm you on my watch". I also believe that to be green is to be irrational, misanthropic and morally defective. They are the barbarians at the gate we have to stand against. Our greatest worry is those within who support and facilitate their misanthropic goals.